They diverted the funding for AI? AI is already a way for rich crooks to steal and make money off public information, if not an outright hype that grifters employ to attract funding for their devious pursuits. None of this is AI’s fault. But politicians should understand the type of people they are funding, instead of ignorantly falling for buzzwords.

I can understand why it excites you. But I’m old enough to recognize that if you cede control of your offline tools like IDE to them, they will eventually exploit it to make money by ruining your day. I’m perfectly happy sacrificing a bit of convenience to protect myself against rent seeking in the future.

Honestly in this day and age where everything runs inside containers, you should be able to do that in your home server. Distrobox proves it. Even a good alternative to vscode exists - theia by eclipse - that’s designed to do exactly this.

I don’t know what’s happening at github, but even the tree page rendering is annoyingly slow now. I wish they stopped ruining a working product by bloating it up with unnecessary ‘features’.

The same thing happens at Amazon. First they screwed up the product search by treating the user’s query as a suggestion rather than as a requirement. Now reports are coming out saying that the search bar has been replaced by an AI prompt with very badly summarized and often wrong results.

I don’t even understand why people like GitHub so much, its source management sucks.

I agree with this part.

GitHub bringing everything into one platform is atypical and obviously done for the goal of centralization.

Perhaps this is part of the answer to why people like github. Unlike you, most people love all-in-one tools. I once suggested a bunch of offline tools to use with git, with much better user experience than github. The other person was like, “Yeah, no! I don’t want to learn that many tools”.

Look for ways to do things separately and you will find much better tools.

The advantage of a centralized app is that all the services you mentioned are integrated well with each other. The distinct and often offline tools often have poor integration with each other. This is harder to achieve in such tools, compared to centralized hosts. The minimum you need to start with is a bunch of standards for all these tools to follow, so that interoperability is possible later.

Github is more than just git. We need decentralized solutions for associated services and persistently online repos.

If you want any change in this, you should formally express your concern using A2A missiles. If they protest, formally deny it. This is what they do after all, isn’t it?

The amount of exploitative powers that the US gives these abusive companies is absolutely insane. The minimum that’s needed for such transgressions is the jailing of responsible management staff.

It’s not as easily dismissed. Many US companies cancel internships/employment offers after the candidate has spent a considerable sum on travel and housing. It’s even more heartless when employment visas are involved.

For some very litigious companies, they’re let off easily after causing huge financial and emotional strain to individuals. They should be punished, penalized and forced to compensate the victims for these.

You’re grossly underestimating the skill and coordination required by human hands. Granted that we don’t notice it. But our body has complex neural pathways that do this without constant attention from our conscious mind.

This is exactly what was predicted as the result of corporate surveillance and targeted ads. They are part of schemes to extract more revenue from you. Another example is the rising premium for health insurance. But people apparently had “nothing to hide”!

You better vote for him in the next rounds too, or it’s going to be see saw.

With this much complexity, why not just use TLS client certificates without PKI and managed by a password manager?

They’re neither crisis managers, nor counsels. The correct term is astroturfers. They all have some vested interests in doing so.

That’s a very low effort way of underplaying the effect of these communities on the broader FOSS communities. There is a good reason why most FOSS developers/maintainers prefer to keep their personal and unrelated politics away from their project communities. For one, unchecked bigotry in isolated communities can turn bad for the general public - for example, 4chan, kiwifarms, etc. I have heard from more than one source that community engages in hate speech and brigading against people outside the communtiy - one example is visible in this video itself. This is why laws specifying limitation to free speech exists.

Now, even if you neglect the brigading, there is still the problem of support and contribution. Hyprland is a widely used project. Many end users and developers are going to stumble into the discord server either seeking support or with intent to contribute. If they belong to any minority group, they might inadvertently expose themselves to bigotry, bullying and harassment. Now you may be compelled to label this as hyperbole and fearmongering. But this is well known, highly underplayed problem in FOSS communities with numerous examples. There are so many cases where women stopped FOSS contributions because they felt insulted and harassed. This problem is why CoCs exist in the first place.

Nobody can force others to follow CoCs. But as Brodie says, it has become very important for end users to evaluate the projects they use - to see if it is a community they want to ever interact with. Similarly, distros need to decide if they want to expose their users to such a community.

How does GDPR mandate a public audit of the code base? Is there such a provision in it? (Not a confrontational question)

There are two disturbing tendencies being demonstrated here:

1. Using useless AI to engage and disperse complaining customers. The AI can’t make meaningful solutions to many customer complaints. But companies use it to annoy the customers into giving up, so that they can save the cost of real customer support.
2. Either blaming the AI or insisting that it’s right, when it makes a mistake. AI by nature is biased and unpredictable. But that doesn’t stop the companies from saying ‘the computer says so’.

These companies need a few high profile hefty penalties as a motivation to avoid such dirty tricks.

This is just the first step at making protests illegal.

I don’t like the monarchy either. But I assume you haven’t seen anyone suffer from cancer. If you did, it’s a misery you won’t wish on your worst enemies.

Why would any other company complain?